4 ms·
> The notion that you can legally run down and kill a child on a bicycle just because that child was "wrong" is what's insane. Even if the kid say, hides behin
by brandonmenc 12y ago
> The notion that you can legally run down and kill a child on a bicycle just because that child was "wrong" is what's insane.
Even if the kid say, hides behind a tree then decides to cut across traffic without warning?
The fact that I'd go to jail for that is what's insane.
- ajuc 12y agoIn most place where this could happen there is speed limit, probably to 30 kmph. At that speed you won't kill that kid. Most probably you will even manage to avoid it completely. Even if there's no speed limit - driving in a middle of town, near a path or pavement lined with trees you should be careful, and slow down. And in rare case that there's a tree near motorway and somehow a kid on a bike managed to get there and hide - you will manage to explain yourself before court. What's important is the attitude. IMHO the attitude "anybody who misbehaves on a road deserve to die" is more insane than having to explain yourself after you killed someone, even if it's not your fault. Death has smaller utility than discomfort.
- brandonmenc 12y ago> the attitude "anybody who misbehaves on a road deserve to die" You are putting words into mouths. It's more like, "acknowledge that if you misbehave on the road, your chances of getting killed increase and it may be your fault." I don't know why it's impossible for some people to hear that without imagining the "deserves" part.